Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35572452›Full record

ArticleJSES international2022

Commercial 3-dimensional imaging programs are not created equal: version and inclination measurement positions vary among preoperative planning software.

Robert A Waltz, Annalise M Peebles, Justin J Ernat, Stephanie K Eble, Patrick J Denard, Anthony A Romeo, Petar Golijanin, Scott M Liegel, Matthew T Provencher

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JSES international, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Robert A WaltzThe Steadman Clinic, Vail, CO, USA.
Annalise M PeeblesSteadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO, USA.
Justin J ErnatThe Steadman Clinic, Vail, CO, USA.
Stephanie K EbleDartmouth Geisel School of Medicine, Hanover, NH, USA.
Patrick J DenardSouthern Oregon Orthopedics, Medford, OR, USA.
Anthony A RomeoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, DuPage Medical Group, Chicago, IL, USA.
Petar GolijaninUniversity of Texas at Austin, Dell School of Medicine, Austin, TX, USA.
Scott M LiegelThe Steadman Clinic, Vail, CO, USA.
Matthew T ProvencherThe Steadman Clinic, Vail, CO, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Variability exists between total shoulder arthroplasty preoperative planning software (PPS) systems for glenoid angular measurements. The purpose of this study is to locate the region on the glenoid at which inclination and version are measured on the PPS modalities of Blueprint and VIP. Methods: Preoperative computed tomography scans of 30 consecutive patients undergoing primary arthroplasty were analyzed using two PPS systems (VIP and Blueprint) to independently obtain glenoid version and inclination measurements through their respective protocols. Three-dimensional equivalent images were independently analyzed utilizing open-source OsiriX DICOM software by two board-certified orthopedic sports medicine surgeons measuring glenoid version and inclination along ten equal intervals of the glenoid from superior to inferior and anterior to posterior. Manual version and inclination measurements were compared to both the VIP and the Blueprint measurements, and variances were analyzed by calculating root mean square error (RMSE). The closest interval (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10) to the VIP and Blueprint measurement was identified for both version and inclination to determine the region of the glenoid both software programs obtained their measurements. Results: Mean glenoid retroversion manually measured using OsiriX was 13.5° compared with 15.1° recorded by Blueprint ( Conclusion: PPS systems for shoulder arthroplasty vary in the region of the glenoid for which version and inclination are measured, which may affect the absolute values generated. Location of version measurement was different among the two commercial software programs, with VIP corresponding closest to the most inferior region of the glenoid, while Blueprint to the most superior one. Further research should assist in determining the version and inclination variations among commercial planning software.

Indexed as

Computed tomographyGlenoidInclinationPreoperative planningShoulderVersion

Identifiers

PMID35572452
PMCPMC9091744

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.